Slashdot Mirror


The CSS Anthology

Bruce Lawson writes "I've read a lot of CSS books, but this one is the one I wished that I'd read when I was learning, and I suspect that other slashdotters may concur. It is firmly pitched at the coder rather than the designer, takes you from CSS virgin to upper intermediate level, with good attention to the process of (re)designing with CSS, legal issues such as Accessibility (section 508), and assumes that you're not scared of mark-up." Lawson offers this disclosure: "I should immediately disclose that I've worked for two different companies that have published the author, Rachel Andrew, but I have no connection with the publishers, or this book." Read on for the rest of his review. The CSS Anthology: 101 Essential Tips, Tricks & Hacks author Rachel Andrew pages 380 publisher SitePoint rating 8 reviewer Bruce Lawson ISBN 0957921888 summary Structured Q&A guide for CSS beginners

Author's credentials

Andrew is a long-term member of the Web Standards Project (WaSP) and programmer, technical project manager, technical team leader/senior developer and webmaster, according to her own bio.

Who's the book for?

The book's subtitle is somewhat misleading. There probably are 101 tips'n'tricks (I didn't count) but it's not the random miscellany that it implies. The information is structured so that a n00b could become proficient by reading the book from start to finish (I tested this out on a colleague). The tips'n'tricks structure does allow you to find what you're looking for in a hurry. The table of contents is easily scanned, and there is an excellent index.

The book doesn't offer advice on how to sex up the beauty of your site. That's fine for me; my current work involves replicating someone else's designs using xhtml and CSS, and as a coder I'm pathologically unable to design the type of showcases that you see at the CSS Zen Garden. A graphic designer might therefore find this book hard work; it jumps straight into a discussion of syntax, and there's occasional geek-directed statements (CSS supports multi-line C-style comments). Similarly, if you're completely new to html, this book probably isn't for you; there's lots of references to pre-CSS ways of working which could potentially be mystifying. Unusually for CSS books, there's a refreshing lack of polemic telling you why you should use style-sheets. If I read another history of the browser wars in a technical book, I shall scream.

So the book's constituency would seem to be those who know how to present information via html, and wish to take advantage of the smaller filesizes, greater flexibility and logical separation of the presentation layer from the mark-up that the (x)html/ CSS combination offers. The logical purity is my personal reason for moving to Web Standards; the trauma of writing text processing applications with VAX Fortran in the late '80s left me with the propensity to weep when I see html as sorely abused I mangled dear old Fortran.

Are you sitting comfortably? Then I'll begin.

Anthology kicks off in the conventional way for CSS books - controlling fonts and colours, styling hyperlinks, headings and the like. Each chunk is structured as a problem (How do I remove the indented left margin from a list?), a solution and sample code, and generally a discussion of related applications of the code, compatibility issues, accessibility notes etc. This is a pretty compact method of explication, and the basics of styling, syntax, pseudo-class order and the like are romped through in 40 pages, but not glossed over. The key to this is that Anthology assumes you know what you want to do, and shows you how to do it.

Chapter 4 (Navigation) is where the real meat begins - making navigation menus that are solely html unordered lists (because a menu is logically a list of links) and styling with CSS, adding rollover effects, styling navigation as buttons, changing the styling to a horizontal navbar, or even Amazon-style tabs without changing the mark-up. I suspect that, although these are techniques that can be found in most CSS books, the brevity and simplicity of the explanation will be revelatory to many. Chapter 5 (Tabular Data) may come as a surprise to those who mistakenly believe that web standards disallows the use of html tables, as it shows how to style tabular data - the examples are a spreadsheet and a calendar. Chapter 6 repeats the trick with that most mundane aspect of web development, the form.

Chapter 7 (Browser and Device Support) is about real-world CSS development. Unlike most books which instruct you to test in loads of browsers and leave it at that, this chapter lists all the main permutations of OS and browser (including tips on installing multiple versions of IE/ Win), and begins discussion of the tried and tested hacks to hide styles from Netscape 4, IE etc. All of this information is available on the web -- but for a newbie who isn't yet aware that it's possible to hide styles from certain browsers, it's a great way to introduce them to the murky practices of real-world CSS development. What's also refreshing in a computer book for n00bs is a discussion of how to seek help on lists and forums, with a guide to etiquette.

Chapter 8 (CSS Positioning and Layout) is where the stuff that stumps many a table-based designer begins. Along with fonts and colours etc, CSS can lay out the stuff on your page. I'm unsure about the success of this chapter; the Q&A structure is great if you're looking to build one of the sites that are explained (and the list is pretty comprehensive), but I came to the chapter hoping to cure a couple of bugs I'd found in a project I'd previously semi-successfully laid out with absolute positioning (A.P.).

Generally, I layout using floats as I also write the html, so it's easy to ensure that the markup spits out <div>s (sections) in the left-to-right, top-to-bottom order that I want to lay them out in. Suddenly, I had two projects that required A.P. for the first time, as it was not cost-effective to change the way that the client's CMS spat out the markup, so AP was required to position sections on the page regardless of where they appeared in the markup.

Anthology served me fine until I tested the page in IE and the layout was off. Nothing in the book gave me any pointers, and in the end I gave up Googling and just used a hack which exploits an IE parser bug to serve different co-ordinates to IE, after finding the hack co-ordinates through trial and error:

#APthing {position:absolute; top:34px; left: 758px; width:108px; height:88px;}
* html #APthing {position:absolute; top:19px; left: 785px;} /*for IE */

OK, so there may be a simple mistake I'm making -- but then, as far as absolute positioning goes, I'm the kind of newbie at whom this book is aimed, and I imagine that others will make the same mistake that I did. If the book had explained where I was going wrong, or given me the above hack, I'd've spent less time with Google and more time with Guinness.

Chapter 9 (Experimentation, Browser Specific CSS and Future Techniques) is successful, except for one small gripe. I'm glad that the author, although a member of the Web Standards Project, isn't an uber-purist. (I'm of the opinion that a little invalid code, if it's the only way to get the job done, isn't a hanging offense). So she shows how to implement IE-only proprietary CSS that can make colourful scrollbars, should you wish to do this. There's also a Mozilla-only CSS trick to allow curved edges to CSS boxes, which I implemented on my homepage that very evening.

However (here's the gripe), the most useful technique shown is one which allows fully-CSS flyout menus that don't rely on JavaScript. The author notes that it won't work for most people, as IE incorrectly restricts the hover pseudo-class to <a> tags only, while the CSS requires hovering over <li> elements.

Well, Yes and No. There's a well-documented and elegant hack which allows a proprietary Microsoft behaviour to be attached to the CSS that attaches a small JScript that corrects the IE bug, and thus allows this extremely useful CSS-only flyout menu to work in IE. I've used the technique myself when required to mimic the look and feel of a client's site while making it DDA/ADA accessible, and it works perfectly. To me, the omission of the IE hack from Anthology is an unfortunate oversight.

Summary

There's a couple of flaws in the book, though I suspect that in order to explain them, I've over-emphasised them. All in all, it's a solid, professional no-B.S. way for someone with a code-oriented mind to get them up to speed, satisfactorily and quickly; a motivated reader could be churning out standards-compliant, bandwidth-friendly sites after a few hour's experimentation. Ordering the book from the publisher's website was a good experience and, unusually, they have a money-back guarantee. As I said, I wish that I'd had access to Anthology when I was learning.

You can purchase The CSS Anthology: 101 Essential Tips, Tricks & Hacks from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

34 of 169 comments (clear)

  1. Ok, let's take up a collection by wowbagger · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ok, let's take up a collection for Rob et. al. to get this book....

    1. Re:Ok, let's take up a collection by The+Ancients · · Score: 5, Funny
      Small steps.

      We need to get them help with their spelling and grammar, first.

    2. Re:Ok, let's take up a collection by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
      It's been done, but because it "won't scale" or some other bogus reason, it will never happen.

      I guess it's just easier to block the W3C validator instead.

  2. Learn online for free by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The added bonus of the online tutorials is that you can see the code in action and edit it yourself as you go. Not sure who would plonk down good money when so many thorough tutorials are online.

    1. Re:Learn online for free by Khuffie · · Score: 2, Informative
      http://www.alistapart.com.

      Might not be newbie friendly, but its got an extensive list of resources.

    2. Re:Learn online for free by someonewhois · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hey look, w3schools teaches it for free too! And look, they're linking to another Sitepoint book...

  3. I like it.... by ZiZ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It is one of the few CSS resources I've found that assume that you know what you're doing except where CSS is concerned, and doesn't try to teach you inane things like how to make a link to another document. I've got a copy that's rapidly becoming worn and well-used.

    --
    This flies in the face of science.
  4. Good review, but... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 5, Insightful
    as a coder I'm pathologically unable to design the type of showcases that you see at the CSS Zen Garden
    I wish people would get out of this mindset that you must be either a coder or an artist and never the twain shall meet. I work quite comfortably on both sides of that fence and I have met plenty of renaissance people in this industry who are just as comfortable with code as they are with a graphic design tool like Photoshop. It's that kind of thinking that leads to the most creative solutions IMHO. Back in the days of Leonardo DaVinci there was no Berlin Wall seperating technical and creative people, it's a relatively recent addition to our culture and a bit of an unhelpful one.
    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:Good review, but... by fuw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know about that. Myself being more skilled in the programming area, I find I have a very difficult time creating a site that I would consider "professional looking". I mean, I love CSS and have jumped head first into creating CSS-based layouts several years ago. My problem however, is not having the "design eye" that gives folks the ability to create such beautiful designs that you often see in CSS Zen Garden.

      Sure, I *want* to create a well designed site, but until I get that knowledge (school) it just ain't going to happen (not for me, anyway).

      > I work quite comfortably on both sides of that fence

      It's easy to say that about yourself, sure I even would try to claim that one. But when I look at sites I have created and compare them to sites done by a *real* graphic designer (web designer), there *is* a huge difference.

      I'd consider myself a professional programmer and an amatuer designer at best.

    2. Re:Good review, but... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I don't know about that. Myself being more skilled in the programming area.....
      I probably should have explained myself a bit better. The point of my original post was that there are people out there who make good designers and good coders at the same time, regardless of what you personally as an individual are good or bad at. It is possible.
      --
      Drill baby drill - on Mars
    3. Re:Good review, but... by fuw · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, but 2/3 of those sites are built on table-based layouts (old school methods). If you're reading a CSS book or already know CSS (for creating layouts), then you're not doing table-based layout.

      Not to raise the hair on your back, but I wouldn't call any of those sites "good design". While they might be very usable and well-structured (not the markup), it doesn't take long to realize that they weren't created by somebody with a background in graphic design. Just compare to any of the sites in the CSS Vault.

      Or if you want a similar theme, check out Red Hat or Suse (Novell).

      I just took a closer look at the Open Source Web Design site, I like that idea. I can't help but think that they need to implement one of their templates on their own site.

  5. CSS is annoying by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Kinda OT, but I wanted to get this off my chest: Is there (shouldn't there be) a way to replace this:

    a.blue {
    color: blue;
    }

    span.blue {
    color: blue;
    }

    div#back {
    color: blue;
    }

    With...

    color: blue {a.blue, span.blue, div#back}

    It fits more with the philosophy that colors and other styles should be in once place and one place only. CSS follows that OK right now, that is, we can put all those things in the same document, but wouldn't it be great if the document itself adhered to the same principle?

    That problem seems to me one of the biggest in CSS. It makes things cluttered, take up 10 times as much space as they otherwise might, and makes for an illogical thought process. The designer doesn't think: I'll go through each element in the page and make them blue, but rather: I want this this and this to be blue. Anyway, just a thought.

    --
    Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
    Africus aut Europaeus?
    1. Re:CSS is annoying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes, it's called grouping. You have your syntax backwards, though. It should be like this:

      a.blue, span.blue, div#back {color: blue;}

      Of course, you don't really need a.blue and span.blue. A simple .blue would work.

    2. Re:CSS is annoying by Vaevictis666 · · Score: 5, Informative

      You've got two options:

      .blue {
      color: blue;
      }

      and have it apply to anything with a class="blue", or

      a.blue, span.blue, div#back {
      color: blue;
      }

      to explicitly declare them. The commas being key in this one.

    3. Re:CSS is annoying by justMichael · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with using a color name in your class definitions is about 2 minutes before the site is complete they decide all the blue stuff should be green and now you have blue that's really green.

      Name them for what they are, not what they look like. Somewhere down the road you'll be glad you did. ;)

    4. Re:CSS is annoying by teneighty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I disagree.

      What CSS *really* needs is variables. For example:

      $border_color: #ccc;

      div.foo
      {
      border: 1px solid $border_color;
      }

      div.bar
      {
      border: 2px solid $border_color;
      }

      Having variables like this would cut down on a lot of the maintenance headaches that CSS can cause.

    5. Re:CSS is annoying by Scarblac · · Score: 3, Funny

      On a similar note, a friend of mine worked at a large telco, where they were told that they had to #define all their constants (in C)... so they (others, not my friend) had code that said #define THIRTEEN 13. The number had to change later, of course...

      The more things change, the more things stay the same :-)

      --
      I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
    6. Re:CSS is annoying by ciroknight · · Score: 2

      *ahem* NO.

      If you want variables, use a language designed to work with variables to dynamically generate CSS. You have plenty of choices: PHP, ASP, Perl, Parrot, etc. ad nauseum.

      CSS *should* be just a formatting language as formatting is what it does, and all of what it does. It's sad that we couldn't just have one end-all formatting language (HTML could have been better..) and that we had to extend it with other languages to make it more flexible, but now we've got something that works. Dynamic languages, on the other hand, like Javascript, can deal with variables and make pages dynamic. And the world remains happy because it's all open standards for anyone to implement.

      Summary: Let's not change CSS if we don't have to. Use a dynamic language to generate your formatting if you must.

      short aside: I agree with the original poster. It would be great if you could choose the element and have it automatically changed in all specified objects, but it'd be tricky to parse I think, and would require a syntax change. I think it's best we stick with the typical "objectList.part { color: bleh; }".

      --
      "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
    7. Re:CSS is annoying by Bitsy+Boffin · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you want variables, use a language designed to work with variables to dynamically generate CSS. You have plenty of choices: PHP, ASP, Perl, Parrot, etc. ad nauseum.

      Why introduce a whole new language into the mix if all you want to do is set some constants that can be used in your CSS.

      Things like
      darkcolor = black;
      lightcolor = green;
      so you can do
      .message { background-color: darkcolor; }
      .text { color: lightcolor; }
      obviously that is trivial, but there are a number of occasions I have come across where it would be useful, mainly with colors which you wish to remain consistent but use in different areas (you might want to use it as a background somewhere, and a border somewhere else, currently the only way to do that with plain-old-css is to hard code the color information in several different rules).

      It almost sounds like you actually LIKED <FONT> etc.
      --
      NZ Electronics Enthusiasts: Check out my Trade Me Listings
  6. CSS? by had3l · · Score: 3, Funny

    Since when you need a book to play Counter Strike: Source?

    1. Re:CSS? by had3l · · Score: 2, Funny

      Manual? You take me for some kind of fool?

  7. CSS W3C Standard by st3v · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually for the experienced person I would recommend learning from the actual "Standard" of CSS at W3C.

    CSS 2.1 Specification

    If you want to see the upcoming CSS 3 standard, or learn more about CSS, you can go here:

    http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/

  8. CSS virgin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    CSS virgin

    Would that be someone who:

    1. doesn't understand CSS at all?
    2. reads/understands CSS, but can't write it?
    3. is proficient in reading and writing CSS, but is a virgin (i.e. 70 % of Slashdotters)?
  9. CSS books? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    First CSS encrypted DVDs, now CSS encrypted books? What's this world coming to? Looks like I won't be able to co^h^hread my books now. ;)

  10. Free? What about the time factor? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not sure who would plonk down good money when so many thorough tutorials are online.

    When you need to get things done FAST, and learn while not in front of your computer monitor, or maybe even have a quickreference handy, you need to buy books. Hey, what if suddenly your internet connection drops?

    I'm a customer of Sitepoint (the company that published the book), and I purchased the "build your own... website using PHP and MySQL". I keep it always handy on my job desk.

    Also, having a manual handy (either printed or downloaded, such as the PHP reference) saves you lots of trouble. I've talked with many people who just use the online PHP manual, and they keep asking me stupid questions they could have answered themselves had they downloaded the reference in CHM format.

    Never forget that time is money, and learning online "for free" might cost you lots of hours that you could have well spent designing a website and getting paid.

  11. Ooooh, that scary markup by Jesus+2.0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    It is "firmly pitched at the coder", but it has to explicitly state that it "assumes that you're not scared of mark-up"?

    If you're "scared" of mere markup, I would hate to see your actual coding.

  12. CSS is not annoying, knowledge must be acquired by fuw · · Score: 2, Informative

    As folks have pointed out, you can set a class for blue text or you can use the comma-separated list to apply the color.

    What people haven't mentioned (I didn't see anyway) is the fact that you can apply multiple classes to a single element. So you can have your "blue" class for blue colored text (although that is a very bad class name...think about if you change the color to green). So you can do... .info{
    color:blue;
    } .att{
    font-weight:bold;
    }
    a{
    text-decoration:none;
    }
    div#back{
    border:1px solid red;
    }

    Then in your HTML...

    <div id="back" class="info">
    <p>this is some text</p>
    </div>
    <p class="info att">This desrves special attention, it should be bold and blue.</p>

    The ability to add multiple classes to a single element is awesome!

  13. Why I hate CSS by david.given · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Basically, I find that the biggest problem with CSS is that it's like most of the other of the W3Cs standards: a really good idea implemented in a really half-assed way. (XML --- plus: namespaces, ASCII, structured data, extensibility. Minus: repetitive, bloaty, unseekable, attributes vs real nodes. XSLT --- plus: general purpose XML transformation language. Minus: it's written in XML; it's not a real programming language; it's stupidly limited in a lot of ways (variables that won't vary?). XPATH --- don't get me started. etc.)

    I'll leave aside whether it's a good idea to have a dynamic web page made up of three *different* scripting systems in one document, and just go on to mention two of the things that bug me most:

    Firstly, it does not seem to be possible (unless I just haven't found it yet, please feel free to correct me) to say that I want style FOO to be the same as style BAR except with these changes. i.e., true hierarchical styles. Any word processor worthy of the name supports this. It allows you to make sure that each important style property is defined in exactly one, central place.

    Secondly, CSS' styling system is very, very limited. How do you say, I want this container to be big enough to fit this string into? You can't. This means that any kind of layout where you have sized objects with text in them --- such as columns, or a header --- has to be specified in fixed values. You can't say, I want a graphic followed by a line of text followed by something that fills all the rest of the space. (You've got ems and ens and points but frankly, they're not useful.)

    I do think that CSS is currently the best thing around for formatting HTML; I've also used it with moderate success for formatting raw XML. It just makes me cringe when I think how good it could be, and how lousy it actually is... I keep having this urge to write my own formatting engine in Javascript, and that's never good.

  14. Here's a handful of good CSS resources by mmmuttly · · Score: 5, Informative
    I spent about 30 hrs this week working the CSS. Here are some of the couple dozen sites I visit regularly. They're not all tutorials, but all are useful. There are a lot of place where standards and the real world usage clash. A couple of tips from me - Build and test your pages in Mozilla first. Even though MSIE still has a huge lead in mkt share, Slashdotters will be surprised to find out that Explorer is a stagnant sun dried dog turd, full of buggy, half-assed standards implementation. It's much easier to do it right first, then insert workarounds so the CSS displays correctly in Explorer. It's easier to achieve the results you want if you start at zero. Null the defaults so that all the implicit layout collapses. * { margin: 0; padding: 0; borders: 0; } If you find these links useful, please pay me back by checking your work on a Mac too. As a website user, I get really sick of seeing display wackiness - especially lines of type with squashed leading or running beyond the container div because nobody bothered to test in a Mac environment too.
    1. Re:Here's a handful of good CSS resources by Unknown+Lamer · · Score: 2, Informative

      You wouldn't happen to know of a decent Mac-browser emulator would you?

      Konqueror

      If it works in Konqueror it should be fine in Safari. OmniWeb uses Safari renderer now and I don't think that anyone really uses IE for Mac anymore since it sucks hard (when I was still in High School the school got a brand new 766Mhz top of the line G4 and installed OS X Beta on it and I used that through X.2 on a daily basis before I graduated...oh how I shall miss thee, backroom OS X box that no one else got to use).

      Mozilla on the Mac is the same as Mozilla everywhere so that covers Firefox, Mozilla, and Camino. I dunno about iCab, I haven't used that since I have 7100/66 back in 98 (running good old OS 8 with 24M of RAM and it was usable dammit).

      --

      HAL 7000, fewer features than the HAL 9000, but just as homicidal!
    2. Re:Here's a handful of good CSS resources by yzka · · Score: 2, Informative

      I use http://browsercam.com/ for testing different CSS-layouts. It's not perfect, but trial version is free for 24 hours... ;)

  15. Maybe you should read a book / the spec by brunes69 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Firstly, it does not seem to be possible (unless I just haven't found it yet, please feel free to correct me) to say that I want style FOO to be the same as style BAR except with these changes.

    What?? It is called Cascading Style Sheets for exactly that reason, it cascades!

    .foo{ background-color: red; color:green; }
    .bar{ color:blue; }

    <div class="foo bar">This has red bg color with blue fg color.</div>

    Secondly, CSS' styling system is very, very limited. How do you say, I want this container to be big enough to fit this string into? You can't.

    Big enough to fit what string? A container can fit any string with a proper overflow property.

    This means that any kind of layout where you have sized objects with text in them --- such as columns, or a header --- has to be specified in fixed values.

    This is simply not true. It is fairly simple to generate tabular layouts using pure CSS (that is what display:table-row and whatnot are for!)

    You can't say, I want a graphic followed by a line of text followed by something that fills all the rest of the space.

    Try this:

    <div style="display:table-row;">
    <div style="display:table-cell"><img src="http://images.slashdot.org/title.gif"/></div>
    <div style="display:table-cell;">Line of text</div>
    <div style="width:100%;display:table-cell;background-co lor:blue;">Fill line</div>
    </div>

    Seriously man.. CSS has lots of limitations (some of which will be addressed in V3, some of which aren't), but nothing like what you are spewing. I really suggest you read up some on the spec before you start bashing it so hashly.

    1. Re:Maybe you should read a book / the spec by david.given · · Score: 2, Insightful
      <div class="foo bar">

      I didn't know about that; useful, although not quite what I'm looking for. Ta.

      (The thing I object to here is that it requires the HTML content to have detailed knowledge of the mechanism of the markup, which is evil --- there's no need for the content to have to state that that particular div is a foo and a bar. It should just be able to state that it's a bar. The relationship to foo should be in the style sheet.)

      Big enough to fit what string? A container can fit any string with a proper overflow property.

      Big enough to fit a string without overflowing, of course.

      Take that hoary old example, the columned layout. On my website I have a columned layout made up of tables. I want the left-hand column to be as small as possible without wrapping the 'cowlark.com' logo in the top-left corner, and the right-hand column to occupy everything else.

      I cannot find a way of doing this with CVS. The problem is working out how wide to make the left-hand column. With tables, the logo does not contain any spaces, and so the table layout algorithm will try quite hard not to wrap it; try resizing the font and you see it all still works (pretty much). With CSS, I have to hard-code the logo's width, and I can't tell what that is, because it depends on the fonts being used.

      I have only recently discovered display:table-row and friends, and I could probably use those instead, but it's still basically tables. There should be a better way.

      CSS has lots of limitations (some of which will be addressed in V3, some of which aren't)

      <plaintively> Can we have decent support for CSS2, please? Leaving aside the aberration that is IE's attempt at CSS implementation, Gecko doesn't even do counters yet...

  16. I believe he was requesting by warrax_666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    something along the lines of

    .foo { background-color: red; color: green; }
    .bar { inherits: .foo; color: blue}

    and that applying <div class="bar"> would then set the bgcolor to red and the fgcolor to blue. In your example you still have to remember that .bar is based on .foo in every single place you use it. Much less useful.

    --
    HAND.